You're using an outdated browser. Please upgrade to a modern browser for the best experience.
Submitted Successfully!
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic. For video creation, please contact our Academic Video Service.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 Timothy E. Morse -- 1225 2025-07-25 08:59:00 |
2 formatted Perry Fu Meta information modification 1225 2025-07-25 10:04:27 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Academic Video Service to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Morse, T.E. Intensifying Instruction: A Conceptualization for Individualizing Effective Instruction. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58678 (accessed on 25 December 2025).
Morse TE. Intensifying Instruction: A Conceptualization for Individualizing Effective Instruction. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58678. Accessed December 25, 2025.
Morse, Timothy E.. "Intensifying Instruction: A Conceptualization for Individualizing Effective Instruction" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58678 (accessed December 25, 2025).
Morse, T.E. (2025, July 25). Intensifying Instruction: A Conceptualization for Individualizing Effective Instruction. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58678
Morse, Timothy E.. "Intensifying Instruction: A Conceptualization for Individualizing Effective Instruction." Encyclopedia. Web. 25 July, 2025.
Peer Reviewed
Intensifying Instruction: A Conceptualization for Individualizing Effective Instruction
This is a peer-reviewed entry published in Encyclopedia Journal, full entry can be found at 10.3390/encyclopedia5030104

Intensifying instruction involves adapting alterable instructional variables to create a more individualized intervention from that which has been presented. Importantly, the intensified instruction is based on a reasoned hypothesis that it will be more effective than prior instruction.

intensifying instruction intensive intervention multi-tiered system of supports early intervening services special education adaptations remedial instruction at-risk students
Historically, teachers have informally employed the concept of intensifying instruction every time they adapted their instruction to remediate a student’s academic achievement deficit. Nonetheless, in the United States, the concept of intensifying instruction formally gained prominence at the turn of the century because of federal legislation that directed schools to account for every student’s performance.
Passed by the United States Congress in 2001, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act increased school accountability by focusing on improving student outcomes. The law’s key features included requiring schools to conduct annual assessments in reading and mathematics in grades 3–8 and reporting the outcome data by subgroups according to race, socioeconomic status, and disability [1]. Subgroup scores served to prevent schools from portraying that their efforts were optimal for all students when the favorable scores of some students may have skewed the school’s aggregate average score higher while masking very suboptimal scores earned by other students. NCLB also required schools to show increased student performance from year to year, referred to as annual yearly progress. Sanctions were levied for schools that did not demonstrate sufficient annual growth, and they were required to submit school improvement plans [1]. The Every Student Succeeds Act replaced the No Child Left Behind Act in 2015, allowing schools more flexibility and agency while keeping in place NCLB’s core features of accountability, assessment mechanisms, and school improvement plans [2].
Shortly after the passage of the NCLB Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)—the federal education law that directs most special education services to students with disabilities in the nation’s public schools—was amended to align with NCLB while allowing schools to use the accompanying federal funds for two primary purposes. One purpose involved the continuation of individualized instruction for students with disabilities. A second purpose was new, which was to begin supporting supplemental early intervening services [3]. Both purposes further enshrined the need for schools to account for every student’s performance.
Under the IDEA, a student with a disability is someone whose disability necessitates special education. Special education is defined, in part, as specially designed instruction that meets the student’s unique needs. This instruction addresses the content to teach, the methodology for teaching it, the location where the services will be provided, their duration, and the service provider. According to a ruling by the United States Supreme Court, because of receiving these services, a student with a disability is to demonstrate progress annually that is appropriate considering their circumstances [4].
Regarding early intervening services, they comprise additional academic and behavioral supports to assist students who have not been identified as needing special education services but must have the supports to advance in the general education curriculum so that they do not eventually require special education. While early intervening services are available to students in kindergarten through 12th grade, emphasis is placed on students in kindergarten through grade 3 [5].
Due to the multifaceted federal legislative emphasis on school accountability for all students, mechanisms were created to enable schools to match their system of interventions to each student’s instructional needs. Chief among the mechanisms was an organizational scheme involving tiers that were described in terms of the types of interventions comprising them. Commonly, these schemes involve a three-tier framework [6]. While current frameworks address students’ academic and behavioral needs, the following brief explanation of a three-tier framework only addresses academics for the sake of clarity. Furthermore, although they are discussed here with respect to events in the United States, it must be said that similar tiered systems are implemented internationally.
Tier 1 involves high-quality instruction for teaching the core curriculum in the general education classroom. Data indicate this instruction will be effective for approximately 80% of students. The students who demonstrate an academic achievement deficit despite receiving this high-quality instruction will be provided with tier 2 services.
Tier 2, which data indicate will be effective with approximately 15% of students, comprises supplemental instruction to remediate students’ academic achievement deficits. When this occurs, the supplemental services will be discontinued, resulting in the student progressing in school with only tier 1 instruction.
Tier 3 services are also supplemental and are provided to students demonstrating significant, persistent performance deficits despite receiving tier 2 services. Estimates are that 3–5% of students will receive tier 3 services, which might be provided throughout their time in school [7].
Initially, one framework, referred to as response to intervention (RTI), was developed and used to address students’ academic achievement, particularly with respect to learning how to read. A second framework, schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS), addressed students’ engagement in appropriate social behaviors [8].
A framework, known as a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS), that integrated the other two frameworks, emerged over time as educators increasingly recognized the interconnection between a student’s attainment of academic skills while receiving instruction in a safe, orderly classroom [9][10]. Altogether, these frameworks have gained favor as evidenced by a report that every state’s department of education website references initiatives or guidance about the implementation of tiered systems of support [11]. Moreover, the Every Student Succeeds Act recognizes MTSS as an approach for improving outcomes for students with disabilities and English language learners [12].
Central to every multi-tiered framework has been the concept of intensifying instruction [13]. It involves adapting alterable instructional variables to further individualize a student’s instruction based on a reasoned hypothesis that it will be more effective than prior instruction [14]. The literature suggests that the concept gained a secure foothold with the establishment of the National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) in 2011 by the United States Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs [12]. The Center’s mission is to build stakeholders’ (i.e., Kindergarten-Grade 12 schools, parents, university faculty, etc.) capacities to address the needs of students demonstrating significant, persistent learning challenges in reading, mathematics, and behavior by implementing intensive intervention [15].
Since its inception, the NCII has championed its data-based individualization (DBI) process, which involves the systematic implementation of intensive intervention. Intensification begins when a student receives tier 2 instruction in an evidence-based standard program. This is a scripted program supported by research that focused on the fidelity of its implementation and the program’s effectiveness regarding students’ acquisition of the targeted learning outcomes. The supplemental program zeroes in on subject matter content that the student must master while increasing the student’s dosage, meaning the total time they receive instruction about the content [16][17][18].
Additionally, the intensification likely results in the student participating in a smaller group that enables them to receive more personalized attention from the teacher. Progress monitoring data are collected systematically and either confirm that a student is making sufficient progress or indicate that the instruction must be intensified further. In some instances, this process leads to a student being referred for an evaluation to determine if special education services are warranted.
The NCII’s work continues to evolve as evidenced by a recent three-part webinar series about intensification strategies [19]. Given its longevity and sponsorship by the United States federal government, the Center is regarded as an authoritative resource for credible information about intensive intervention, particularly intensifying instruction.

References

  1. Every Student Succeeds Act, Pub. L. No. 114–95. 2015. Available online: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1177 (accessed on 1 June 2025).
  2. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Pub. L. No. 108–446. 2004. Available online: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1350 (accessed on 1 June 2025).
  3. Yell, M.L.; Bateman, D. Defining educational benefit: An update on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District (2017). Teach. Except. Child. 2020, 52, 283–290.
  4. Yell, M.L. The Law and Special Education, 4th ed.; Pearson: Boston, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 334–338.
  5. The IRIS Center. RTI (Part 1): An Overview. 2006. Available online: https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti01/#content (accessed on 1 August 2020).
  6. Bailey, T.R.; Chan, G.; Lembke, E.S. Aligning intensive intervention and special education with multi-tiered systems of support. In Essentials of Intensive Intervention; Edmonds, R.Z., Gandhi, A.G., Danielson, L., Eds.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 136–153.
  7. Stewart, R.M.; Martella, R.C.; Marchand-Martella, N.E.; Benner, G.J. Three-tier models of reading and behavior. J. Early Intensive Behav. Interv. 2005, 2, 115–124.
  8. Lane, K.L.; Oakes, W.P.; Cantwell, E.D.; Royer, D.J. Building and Installing Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tiered (Ci3T) Models of Prevention: A Practical Guide to Supporting School Success, 1st ed.; Apple Books: Cupertino, CA, USA, 2016.
  9. Stewart, R.M.; Benner, G.J.; Martella, R.C.; Marchand-Martella, R.C. Three-tier models of reading and behavior: A research review. J. Posit. Behav. Interv. 2007, 9, 239–253.
  10. Bailey, T.R. Is MTSS/RTI Here to Stay? All Signs Point to Yes! Center on Multi-Tiered System of Supports at the American Institutes for Research. 2018. Available online: https://rti4success.org/blog/mtssrti-here-stay-all-signs-point-yes (accessed on 1 July 2024).
  11. Danielson, L.; Edmonds, R.Z.; Gandhi, A.G. Introduction. In Essentials of Intensive Intervention; Edmonds, R.Z., Gandhi, A.G., Danielson, L., Eds.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 1–6.
  12. Potter, J. What to Do When Students Don’t Respond to Interventions. Center on Multi-Tiered System of Supports at the American Institutes for Research. 2023. Available online: https://mtss4success.org/blog/students-dont-respond-interventions (accessed on 1 July 2024).
  13. Morse, T.E. Revisiting the multi-tiered system of supports framework: An important mechanism for realizing equitable education in urban schools. Educ. Urban Soc. 2024, 56, 1051–1064.
  14. Vanderbilt University. Special Education Resource Project. 2025. Available online: https://my.vanderbilt.edu/spedteacherresources/national-institute-for-intensive-intervention/ (accessed on 6 June 2025).
  15. National Center on Intensive Intervention at the American Institutes for Research. Data-Based Individualization: A Framework for Intensive Intervention. 2013. Available online: https://intensiveintervention.org/resource/data-based-individualization-framework-intensive-intervention (accessed on 3 June 2025).
  16. Peterson, A.; Danielson, L.; Fuchs, D. Introduction to intensive intervention: A step-by-step guide to data-based individualization. In Essentials of Intensive Intervention; Edmonds, R.Z., Gandhi, A.G., Danielson, L., Eds.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 9–29.
  17. Fuchs, D.; Fuchs, L.S.; Vaughn, S. What is intensive instruction and why is it important? Teach. Except. Child. 2014, 46, 13–18.
  18. National Center on Intensive Intervention at the American Institutes for Research. 3 Part Workshop Series: Getting “Unstuck:“ Strategies for Responding When an Intervention Isn’t Working. 2025. Available online: https://intensiveintervention.org/news-and-events/3-part-diagnostic-data-workshop (accessed on 1 May 2025).
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Education & Educational Research
Contributor MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register : Timothy E. Morse
View Times: 205
Online Date: 25 Jul 2025
Table of Contents
    Notice
    You are not a member of the advisory board for this topic. If you want to update advisory board member profile, please contact office@encyclopedia.pub.
    OK
    Confirm
    Only members of the Encyclopedia advisory board for this topic are allowed to note entries. Would you like to become an advisory board member of the Encyclopedia?
    Yes
    No
    ${ textCharacter }/${ maxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    There is no comment~
    ${ textCharacter }/${ maxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    ${ selectedItem.replyTextCharacter }/${ selectedItem.replyMaxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    Confirm
    Are you sure to Delete?
    Yes No
    Academic Video Service
    Feedback